volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
This is one of those many, many examples showing that the Federalist Society is not, as is so often reported, particularly conservative, and it regularly puts out content that is strongly anti-conservative.
I've been listening to a lot of their content over the years, and it's always striking to me how that reputation against them has become so common in liberal circles.
It just doesn't square with my own experience with the organization.
COULD you actively take down the copycat, if it wasn't your instance? You could certainly try, IF you knew about the copycat, with no guarantee of success.
Again, the advantages you're speculating about are really not as great as you present.
You keep talking about offloading the burden to the end user, but I'd see it as allowing the end user control over they experience!
Unwanted content? Who's wants? I'd say the end user's wants are what matters most there, so YES, I want the end user to have say over the content he sees.
It's fine if you don't personally value that, but you seem really against this system for reasons that range from differences without distinction through your own personal preferences.
I always get a kick out of people who ask the exact right question, rhetorically, when the literal answer is squarely the one needed to counter their stance.
Case in point, a clip of #Trump stumping with, "How can [they] put me on trial during an election campaign[..]?"
Well, sure, sir, let's walk you through how the judicial process works in the US, since it sounds like you could use a review, and then cover how your own choices opened you up to that process.
That should be a pretty complete answer to "How?" ... thanks for asking.
But mainly, I think I've heard lawyers say to never ask a witness a question when you're not positive the answer would support your case.
It's good advice in general.
I don't think the distinction is quite as stark as you make it sound.
After all, I could start mirroring all your content as JustusWingert-at-mastodon.hacker and it would get to the same result: to paraphrase, it wouldn't be noticed unless someone went ahead and manually compared domain names.
Domain names which are often enough clipped off the screen.
In the end I think the advantages of the relay model over the instance model might make this marginal increase in userfriendliness not really worth it.
@taylanb@mstdn.social
Ha, I've heard tale of such things, but never tried it myself.
It might be a feature of Mastodon and not ActivityPub. It could be that Mastodon just added a feature that displays an RSS feed in line with your normal display.
So I may have spoken too soon.
@Raspberry_Pi@raspberrypi.social
Oh gosh, one could go through each of those claims, showing that it's based on either a factually false version of events or fundamental misunderstandings of the design of the US federal government.
It's not so much an indictment of SCOTUS as of the state of journalism and civics education in the country.
From the appellate role, at most, in presidential elections through the Court's emphasis that Congress's duly passed regulations must be respected, these claims are just more sensationalism.
Perhaps they have a place offering their newsletters as an RSS feed that you can subscribe to here?
@Raspberry_Pi@raspberrypi.social
You wouldn't know unless you manually compared fingerprints... so do that?
In Nostr users are identified by public key, right? So if you're posting with a separate key then you're not pretending to be a the user, you're identifying yourself as a different user mirroring all the posts.
I don't think this criticism is especially valid since it seems to be saying Nostr offers no protection except the one it offers.
@taylanb@mstdn.social
@vegafjord I had the same reactoin that @maegul did.
Maybe we should aspire to a day when #Fediverse and #Mastodon interfaces were that intuitive and technical issues weren't so intrusive, but that's not where we are today.
Everything from cross-instance addressing through security through "why am I not seeing all the comments?" intrude into user experiences, putting instances pretty front and center at this point.
Societies shunning each other is (hopefully) not nearly as apparently in day to day usage as this other stuff.
As I recall, I called for Trump's impeachment for the exact same reason: his refusal to oversee his agencies.
Heck, these days I tell every Republican who would listen that they need to be running against Trump based on his failure to manage his branch. It's amazing that so many of the exact things I hear conservatives complaining about come directly out of Trump's epic failures in the job, that they allow him to trumpet as successes without calling him on it!
Unfortunately it's such an echo chamber in here I can't find many conservatives to ask them, what are they thinking?
I am willing to believe that Biden sharked his responsibilities like that, and I would consider that to be an impeachable dereliction of duty.
The DOJ operates subordinate to the president, the head of that branch of government. Should a president so proudly declare that he won't exercise oversight of the most powerful law enforcement agency in the country, that's a pretty big deal!
And it's a shame that we would tolerate it as it is a very dangerous precedent to be setting.
@nus@mstdn.social
Well that's one part I think I can clarify without repeating: upset? No I'm not upset. I just got a kick out of the absurdity of your statement. It made me laugh!
This whole story is not one with enough substance to get anybody upset over, IMO.
It's like this person is so obsessed with a particular bit of drama that they are willing to overlook how governance in the US actually works, and that's a real shame.
I mean the system specifically prevents such unelected people from having such major roles in governing, handing them little more than appellate jurisdiction opinions.
The actual governing mainly takes place in the other branches of the federal government, and for a really good reason!
@nus@mstdn.social
You are incorrect, and I just didn't want to repeat myself above.
You seem to have misunderstood what I wrote above, but again I just feel like I would be repeating myself should I restate it, so that doesn't look productive.
Oh no it's quite the opposite: It is in support of liberal democracy that we need to highlight the political branch, the representative branch, and focus on electing better congresspeople instead of being distracted with all this mess.
After all, if we don't want a particular justice on the court anymore the process for making that happen runs right through the people we elect to Congress.
They are free to impeach and remove any justice anytime their political responsibility to voters arrives at that compulsion.
It is BECAUSE liberal democracy is so important that we need to focus much more solidly on the branch that is there to engage liberal democracy.
@nus@mstdn.social
Oh, no, not at all! I didn't find your claim the least bit interesting. It comes across as anecdotal projection relying on subjective and normative comparisons with little actual insight.
It's both.
volkris
boosted
DNA Lounge Update, Wherein today is Zero Cool Day
https://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2023/08/10.html
@nus@mstdn.social
I didn't say anything about your complaints about the scaling.
But it jumped out at me that you were making this particular complaint, about the graph about identity focusing on identity.
I would have other questions about this research, about its methodology, that go far beyond how they scaled their graph, but then, I don't actually think this claim is particularly substantial enough to track it down.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
